The Swaro is supposed to have a small beam, but that huge aiming circle is impossible to be consistant with.

Shag, I assume we are talking about the Swaro 8x30 Laserguide? If so that beam is among some of the largest. Like 6'x6' at 1000 yards . The Leica is much smaller especially in height which helps alot over flat terrain. Your experience with those mis-ranges on the targets is comparable with the experiences I had with the 5 Swaro's I owned in the past. Also with the testing I have done with the Zeiss Mono RF, the G7-Br2 and some others. Just got to watch them large beams. It is worth while doing a search for specs and finding the Beam Divergence of a unit and compare with others before you buy.

PS: the newer Leica CRF 1200 and CRF 1600 are far better than the larger flat box Leica 1200 scan Rangemaster you have. A person needs to watch for old data and threads on the net. If a Leica RF is refered to as a "Leica 1200" I would be questioning if it is the older unit or the newer CRF unit as they are much difference in performance. At least mine are.

Broz,
Thanks a ton for you input. I know from following you here that your input is more than mere thoughts or personal opinion, it's always backed by some sort of scientific evidence, and is well respected.
As far as beam divergance, I've seen the specs on most of the models available. I guess I just misplaced the facts on the Swaro 8x30 in my mind. The Leica 1600 is the only unit I was considering other than the Bushnell 1600 Elite. If the Leica CRF series is that much better than my LRF series, I am sure I will be very satisified. I shot this evening out to 1164 yards and the LRF and my rifle were flawless. But that was under overcast skies and ranging steel, if I can only get a rangefinder to work like that in full sun and on game, it would be a perfect world.

I have a Leica crf 1200. Jeff and I compared notes a week or so ago, and my Leica was spot on out to 1200 yards. We didn't try ranging beyond that, but I have seen ranges in the mid 1300s. With my new rifle and its long rang ability, I find myself wanting the crf1600 or perhaps saving my pennies for a Vectronics Terrapin.

"If you're used to the Leica glass, you won't be a happy camper with the Bushell, I don't think. While the Bushnell is plenty adequate in the glass department, the Leica glass seems sharper (my shooting partner has the 1200 Leica, like yours)."

I need to correct that statement... after (sheepish as all get out here)... :o ... I found the FOCUS wheel on my ARC 1600. I'd been using the thing over a month without realizing that they do have a focus wheel on them... :o

Anyway... when I focused the ARC 1600, the Leica had nothing on the Bushnell glass.

I've used the Leica LRF 1200 beside the Fusion 1600, and the Bushnell beat the Leica, hands down. The "brush" and "bullseye" modes in the Bushnell mitigate the larger beam divergence, compared to the Leica 1600, to some degree. The CRF does range a bit better than the LRF, but the Bushnell beats both 1200 versions, IMO. The Fusion will hit evergreens out to just shy of 1900 yards, IMO, and animals like deer and cows to at least 1300 (I've not had the chance to try it much beyond that). The RF in the Elite 1600 is supposed to be identical to the one in the Fusion.

I have no experience with the CRF 1600, but in the $700 range, you have to decide if you want a monocular RF like the CRF, or a RF bino like the Fusion. I would suggest that the Leica 1600 would be marginally better than the monocular Elite 1600 or the bino Fusion 1600, but the Elite 1600 is $450 compared to $700 for the Leica. Worth the extra coin? Your call.

Well I have had two Bushnells and now am on my third Leica. I first had the LRF then went to the CRF 900. After 7 years of hard use it finally started giving me trouble. 15 days in the CO dust this SEP on an elk hunt is what caused the probelms. I sent it back for repair and I just received a brand new CRF 1000 for Leica at no charge. I had the option to upgrade to the 1600 but have no need for my applications to go that route.